USA v. Gamino Sanchez

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs. 	2:25-cr-190
JUDGE MICHAEL H. WATSON
MARIO GAMINO SANCHEZ
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The United States and defendant Mario Gamino Sanchez entered into
a Plea Agreement, ECF No. 20,1 executed pursuant to the provisions of
Rule 11(c)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, whereby
defendant agreed to enter a plea of guilty to an Information charging
him with possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a
mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (Count 1), and possession of a firearm in
furtherance of the drug trafficking crime charged in Count 1, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) (Count 2). Information, ECF No.
20. The Information also includes a forfeiture provision. Id. On
December 10, 2025, and assisted by a Spanish interpreter, defendant
personally appeared with his counsel for an arraignment and entry of
guilty plea proceeding.
Defendant waived his right to an indictment in open court and
after being advised of the nature of the charges and of his rights.
See Fed. R. Crim P. 7(b).
Defendant consented, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(3), to enter a
guilty plea before a Magistrate Judge. 	See United States v. Cukaj, 25
Fed.Appx. 290, 291(6th Cir. 2001)(Magistrate Judge may accept a guilty
plea with the express consent of the defendant and where no objection
to the report and recommendation is filed).
1 The Plea Agreement contains an appellate waiver that preserves only
certain claims for appeal, collateral challenge, and motion for reduction of
sentence. In the Plea Agreement, defendant agreed to the forfeiture provision
in the Information. Defendant also acknowledged the likely immigration
consequences of his guilty plea.
Case: 2:25-cr-00190-MHW Doc #: 23 Filed: 12/10/25 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

2
During the plea proceeding, the undersigned observed the
appearance and responsiveness of defendant in answering questions.
Based on that observation, the undersigned is satisfied that, at the
time he entered his guilty plea, defendant was in full possession of
his faculties, was not suffering from any apparent physical or mental
illness and was not under the influence of narcotics, other drugs, or
alcohol.
Prior to accepting defendant’s plea, the undersigned addressed
defendant personally and in open court and determined his competence
to plead. 	Based on the observations of the undersigned, defendant
understands the nature and meaning of the charges in the Information
and the consequences of his plea of guilty to those charges.
Defendant was also addressed personally and in open court and advised
of each of the rights referred to in Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure.
Having engaged in the colloquy required by Rule 11, the Court
concludes that defendant’s plea is voluntary. 	Defendant acknowledged
that the Plea Agreement signed by him, his attorney, and the attorney
for the United States and filed on November 20, 2025, represents the
only promises made by anyone regarding the charges in the Information.
Defendant was advised that the District Judge may accept or reject the
Plea Agreement and that all sentencing terms will be determined by the
District Judge. Defendant was further advised that, even if the
District Judge refuses to accept any provision of the Plea Agreement
not binding on the Court, or if the sentence imposed is more severe
than the sentence that defendant expected, defendant may nevertheless
not withdraw his guilty plea on that basis.
Defendant confirmed the accuracy of the statement of facts
supporting the charge, which is attached to the Plea Agreement. 	He
confirmed that he is pleading guilty to Counts 1 and 2 of the
Information because he is in fact guilty of those crimes. 	The Court
concludes that there is a factual basis for the plea.
Case: 2:25-cr-00190-MHW Doc #: 23 Filed: 12/10/25 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

3
The Court concludes that defendant’s plea of guilty to Counts 1
and 2 of the Information is knowingly and voluntarily made with
understanding of the nature and meaning of the charges and of the
consequences of the plea.
It is therefore RECOMMENDED that defendant’s guilty plea to
Counts 1 and 2 of the Information be accepted. 	Decision on acceptance
or rejection of the Plea Agreement was deferred for consideration by
the District Judge after the preparation of a presentence
investigation report.
In accordance with S.D. Ohio Crim. R. 32.1, and as expressly
agreed to by defendant through counsel, a written presentence
investigation report will be prepared by the United States Probation
Office. 	Defendant will be asked to provide information; defendant’s
attorney may be present if defendant so wishes. 	Objections to the
presentence report must be made in accordance with the rules of this
Court.
If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report
and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file
and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation,
specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part
thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 	28
U.S.C. §636(b)(1); F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). 	Response to objections must be
filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy
thereof. 	F.R. Civ. P. 72(b).
The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to
the Report and Recommendation will result in a forfeiture of the right
to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the
decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation.
See United States v. Wandahsega, 924 F.3d 868, 878 (6th Cir. 2019);
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
December 10, 2025 	s/ 	Norah McCann King
Date 	Norah Mc Cann King
United States Magistrate Judge
Case: 2:25-cr-00190-MHW Doc #: 23 Filed: 12/10/25 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>